aside Judge Brett Kavanaugh Is A Political Animal Who Will Strip Women Of Their Rights To Legal Abortions

It was on the 6th day of September 2018 or the third day of the US Senate Judiciary Committee’s confirmation hearing for the republican Judge Brett Kavanaugh who’s being considered for the job as a Supreme Court justice, where he finally showed his true colors regarding women’s rights to legal abortion medical procedures.

He was more relaxed to where his guard was down while being questioned by the friendly Texan republican Senator Ted Cruz. This was when he let the words slip, “abortion-inducing drugs.” which is a talking point used by right-wingers to to intentionally confuse contraception with other drugs.

BRETT KAVANAUGH/ AP Photo

Here’s the rest of the story…

On September 6, 2018, Karoli Kuns of Crooks and Liars penned the following report, “Kavanaugh Slips, Calls Birth Control ‘Abortion Inducing Drugs’

Excerpts:

“And with three words, the mask falls away from Brett Kavanaugh and his naked extremism is revealed.”

“During questioning by Ted Cruz about RFRA the “Priests for Life” case, Kavanaugh let his guard down long enough to tell us all what he thinks birth control is.”

“Kavanaugh explained the case this way: “That was a group that was being forced to provide a certain kind of coverage over their religious objection to their employees. And under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the question was first was this a substantial burden on the religious exercise.”

“It seemed to me quite clearly it was. It was a technical matter of filling out a form. In that case they said filling out the form would make them complicit in the provision of the abortion-inducing drugs that they were, as a religious matter, objecting to.”

SEN. CRUZ (L)

“The Guttmacher Institute, in 2014, explained how extreme this is:

Yet, these same mainstream antiabortion groups have not shied away from asserting in other contexts that certain methods of contraception are actually methods of abortion. They have in effect selectively embraced the core “personhood” argument—that U.S. policy should in some circumstances recognize pregnancy as beginning at fertilization—as a way to undermine access to birth control. That strategy reached a new high water mark when it featured centrally in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, the high-profile 2014 U.S. Supreme Court case that granted certain for-profit employers an exemption from the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA’s) contraceptive coverage guarantee. During this debate, leading organizations dedicated to banning abortion unequivocally endorsed the view—in legal briefs, press statements and elsewhere—that emergency contraceptives and IUDs constitute abortion.

It is medically untrue, and Kavanaugh just revealed his extremist, fundamentalist, misogynistic views toward women and their right to control their bodies.”

As per a 9/2/18 CNN report on 2 prior cases he reviewed regarding abortion issues by Clare Foran and Joan Biskupic:

“One of Kavanaugh’s opinions likely to draw scrutiny from senators is his dissent from a rulingof the DC Circuit last October that an undocumented immigrant teen in detention was entitled to seek an abortion.”

“In his dissent, Kavanaugh wrote the Supreme Court has held that “the government has permissible interests in favoring fetal life, protecting the best interests of a minor, and refraining from facilitating abortion.” He wrote that the high court has “held that the government may further those interests so long as it does not impose an undue burden on a woman seeking an abortion.” He said the majority opinion was “based on a constitutional principle as novel as it is wrong: a new right for unlawful immigrant minors in US government detention to obtain immediate abortion on demand.” (Here the undue burden test involved the minor having her right to an abortion delayed for weeks.)”

“Kavanaugh’s opinion in a case involving a challenge under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to the Affordable Care Act’s so-called contraceptive mandate, Priests for Life v. HHS, has also drawn scrutiny. In a dissent, he expressed sympathy for the religious challengers. Making reference to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, he wrote that “the regulations substantially burden the religious organizations’ exercise of religion because the regulations require the organizations to take an action contrary to their sincere religious beliefs.” (As per a Sen Feinstein tweet: “To block women’s access to contraception, Kavanaugh ruled that it was “too burdensome” for employers to fill out a two page form.”

There are two Republican Party Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska who have indicated that they are leaning in favor of Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court because he has given them cover by being careful in his wording about his being respectful of ‘stare decisis’ or precedent as a way to say that he would not overturn women’s abortion rights because the Supreme Court ruling in Roe v Wade makes this access legal, because it is settled law.

His latest comments puts the lie to his words. These two senators have to know that they cannot deny his leanings towards ending legal abortions’ rights.

We who are part of the resistance need to inundate them with lots of phone calls, emails, faxes and letters.

Dear Resistance Members, those Democratic US Senators who will be up for re-election in Republican leaning districts this November 2018, have to be advised that voting in favor of the republican replacement, Judge Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, like some did with the Justice Neil Gorsuch, is not an option.

While they may end up losing for hanging tight with their other democratic colleagues in the US Senate, they will definitely not win if they turn coat.

On May 10, 2018, Simone Pathe of Roll Call penned the following report, “Six Months Out: The 10 Most Vulnerable Senators In 2018.”

Excerpts:

“As always, this list is compiled after consultation with strategists from both sides of the aisle and the race ratings from Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales.”

“Heller remains at the top spot because he’s the only Republican up for re-election in a state Clinton carried in 2016, and Democrats have a favorable national environment this cycle. Heller has one less hurdle with perennial candidate Danny Tarkanian dropping his primary challenge to run for the House, at Trump’s urging. Democrats contend Heller moving toward Trump while Tarkanian was in the race could come back to haunt him. They have coalesced around Rep. Jacky Rosen, who is already up on television. (She does have a self-funding primary challenger.)”

“Although some Republicans have fretted that likely GOP challenger Josh Hawley wasn’t living up to expectations, McCaskill is still one of the most vulnerable incumbents. Hawley’s fundraising caused some concern, but he also shook up his team, bringing in experienced GOP fundraiser Katie Walsh, according to Politico. Some operatives say Hawley could be hurt by his connection to disgraced Missouri GOP Gov. Eric Greitens, but Hawley’s team says the scandals won’t affect him. Republicans say Missouri is moving to the right.”

“Former state Rep. Mike Braun, who touts himself as a businessman outsider in the mold of Trump, is taking on the first-term Democratic senator. In a big Trump state, Donnelly’s got his work cut out for him, as Braun — who’s got plenty of his own money — will try to tie him to Washington, much like he did his two primary opponents. But Braun’s state legislative record and business background comes with its own vulnerabilities, and Donnelly has proved willing to support the president at times.”

“Heitkamp is the only statewide Democratic official in North Dakota, and Republicans believe the state’s shift to the right means she’s in serious trouble this year. Her challenger, GOP Rep. Kevin Cramer, has the advantage of not facing a primary. As the state’s at-large member, he also enjoys high name recognition. Heitkamp does still have a cash on hand advantage with $5.4 million in the bank, compared to Cramer’s $1.9 million. Heitkamp has a strong personal brand in the state as an independent lawmaker.”

“Facing state Attorney General Patrick Morrisey in November, Manchin’s in for a tough race in a state that went big for Trump. Morrisey will tout his lawsuits against the Obama administration and hammer Manchin on his support for Clinton in 2016. But Morrisey’s not without his own ties to Washington and the pharmaceutical industry, which could complicate the GOP playbook. The senator has a significant cash-on-hand advantage.”

2 comments

I would truly like to take his “religious freedom” and put it in a place where the sun never shines. Grrrrrrrrrr.

And “favoring fetal life” … for what, to throw the baby into a detention center in Brownsville, Texas where it can be kept in a cage like a zoo animal?

Birth control, for this ‘man’s information, is NOT an abortion pill! I would love for him and Hobby Lobby’s CEO to ‘splain to me how they plan to support all the children they would like to force to be born and whose mother’s cannot afford to support them. Now, they want to force women to have children, but there is a hue and cry when we are asked to pay for medical insurance or … GASP … food for that baby. I’m beginning to think Lorena Bobbitt had the right idea all along! Ggrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

Sorry for ranting, my friend … this is just ridiculous, though … I bet money that if men could get pregnant, their views would be dramatically altered.

If by some miracle the 2 republican female Senators, Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins and their constituents can be persuaded that he is dissembling and that he will definitely do every thing possible to deprive women of legal abortion rights, then it will become more untenable for them and the nervous democratic candidates running for reelection in November to continue to back this judge.

The nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh has been avoiding answering directly that he will NOT overturn Roe v Wade but he keeps saying that he is a respecter for precedent or stare decisis (settled law) which means virtually nothing at the Supreme Court level as he can choose to ignore precedent as the top court justice in the land.

I do detect a democratic strategy. If this guy can be stopped and if by another miracle, the Democrats take over the majority position in the US Senate, then they would be in a stronger position to fight back to protects women’s and other minority groups’ rights.